Absence of a worldly ambition doesn't mean an absence of ambition. Ambitions are different. Some people want
to be rock-stars and some, choose to stay happy and peaceful. Too bad personal
happiness and peace is misinterpreted as ‘no fire in the belly’ or being ambition-less This materialistic world loves ‘go-getters’. And that’s the
problem with this world; there’s too much of going and ‘getting’ things for
yourself. Till the time one doesn't ‘get’ things, one is not an ‘achiever’.
To this world I ask, “Why do you
label ‘go-givers’ ambition-less, weak, under-achievers or failures?” Is it
because they don’t fit a bill accepted by the majority? Or is it the fear that
this minority of an aberration will shatter your illusive world?
It hurts that go-givers are never
noticed. It hurts that go-givers are considered ambition-less It hurts that
go-givers are sidelined.
Very few times the go-givers are
forced to show their truth to the world. But I say, it is worthless do so. Because the
world has blindly, voluntarily and without offering any thought, castrated
itself to incapability to understand their stance.
When the focus is on getting,
giving becomes an unviable option.
A deviation exists to question
the majority of its conscience and thought. There is no way it can be silenced.
Anomalies are wonderful. If you can’t celebrate anomalies, at least don’t
squash it.
And to the world, I dare say, the
go-getters are remembered when they pass away, but it’s the go-givers who are
missed.
- Aamir Ayubi
